Slowly but surely moving in the direction of evidence-based conditional funding/payments.

Reference 10 of the article is also interesting.https://www.healthaffairs.org/do/10.1377/hblog20161228.058133/full/A lot of work to be done, but potential ways to include true measures of patient satisfaction and coming to grips with the transparency paradox.Maybe patients will read rating surveys and reliable review sites (just like what you do before you go to a restaurant, hotel etc) before making a healthcare choice.

If I read it correctly, it looks like they would be allowed to make a 15% margin before interest, taxes, and headquarters.

If that's right, presumably, some facilities would be making substantially less and some substantially more. On the whole, it would be a bad thing. Unless they built a bunch of facilities that weren't being used to grow .

However, if a facility is underperorming/losing money and assuming cms is close to break even... is commercial really going to allow them to be charged more than the going rate in these cases? Hard to imagine.

If they don't allow that, than many current and future facilities would be closed/not built.... causing a serious proximity problem for patients. There's really no point in building some out that may take years to eek out a profit... or keep one open.

Interesting that they make no mention of the fact that private dialysis companies make no money on their Medicare/Aid patients.

"The Act is intended to be budget neutral for the State to implement and administer."

Perhaps this statement is true to the extent that if this legislative non-sense were enacted there would be no consequences.

It's obvious that the sole beneficiary would be the carrier. What's missing is that a carrier's job is to insure risk. This isn't Federally-subsidized flood insurance. Carriers should increase premiums to cover the difference and deal with the consequences.

Wait... they already have increased premiums after ACA.

Now carriers want to reduce reimbursement AND increase premiums again?

Sure, DaVita is for profit, but DaVita has a positive impact on the health care system as a whole.